On Sat, Apr 12, 2003 at 04:09:54PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > I don't mind standardizing to a widely-adopted API for network > communication, provided that it can support the functionality we already > have with FNP - I simply didn't understand why you were criticising FNP > on the basis that it didn't support NAT circumvention where your > proposal doesn't support it either, it just supports outsourcing the > problem elsewhere - this is hardly a valid criticism of FNP.
As a follow-up - I don't think we should accept any performance reduction just so we can standardize to something like this. I am all for code-reuse, but not if it means reduced efficiency or functionality. Ian. -- Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Founder, Locutus http://locut.us/ Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
